• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Criminal Law,dealing with the subject of murder and how applying the general principles of criminal law will help us in deciding an outcome

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Criminal Law LR2S07 This essay will be dealing with the subject of murder and how applying the general principles of criminal law will help us in deciding an outcome. To begin with murder can be defined as 'a common law offence, which is the unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace with malice aforethought.'1 It is important to establish whether Mens Rea and Actus Reus are present. In most cases is an act of crime because the person committing it intended to do something wrong. This mental state is generally referred to as Mens rea, or guilty mind. Mens rea expresses a belief that people should be punished only when they have acted in a way that makes them morally blameworthy.2 The Actus Reus is a guilty action, which may not necessarily involve intent. The main facts of the case are as follows: John was a Carsea United supporter, he brought three flares to the match with he planned to release into the crowd to disrupt the match is the opposition, Swaniff City, were in the lead. After half time, Swaniff City were clearly leading so John decided to release the flares. ...read more.

Middle

Referring to the cases of Malcherek (1981) 1 WLR 690 and Pagett (1983) 76 Cr App R2799 if Pablo's death was caused by a combination of the two causes and Johns act remains a significant cause then he will be liable. Pablo's unfortunate situation at the hospital can be taken into account by discussing how his treatment may have contributed to his death. The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies states that the courts are unwilling as a matter of policy to find that medical treatment has broken the chain of causation when it follows an initial unlawful act by someone else. The case of Jordon (1956) 40 Cr App R 152 no longer has much strength on its outcome as the case of Smith (1959) 2 QB 35. The Court of Appeal has subsequently confirmed the approach taken in Smith, indicating that Jordon has practically no relevance any more, except in the most 'extraordinary or extreme'10 case. It is evident from looking at these cases that the chain of causation will virtually never be broken by medical negligence and that the law will follow this rule as set down in Smith and as applied recently in Cheshire (1991) ...read more.

Conclusion

2) Did John foresee it as virtually certain to occur? Taking these questions into account, John did point the flares at the Swaniff fans, 'whom he hates passionately'. These two questions only apply when there is not direct intent, after analysing the facts, one can say that John did see some sort of damage to occur and it can be said that the consequence of someone getting hurt was a virtual certainty, but the notion of intent to kill may not have been present. Section 18 OAPA 1861 states that wounding or GBH which must be inflicted 'maliciously', but the word 'maliciously' means foresight of the consequence. John must have had to have foreseen a risk and recklessly gone ahead and taken it. Intention to cause grievous bodily harm, but not to cause death, is sufficient to establish the mens rea for murder. John, if found reckless, would be faced with manslaughter. Caldwell [1982] C 341 has been overruled by the House of Lords in R v G and Another [2003] UKHL 50 and now a subjective test for recklessness applies to criminal damage. In conclusion, John is not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. Oblique intent can be said to exist or be capable of existing when John saw the consequence as certain or virtually certain as a result of his actions. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Criminal law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

4 star(s)

A good essay, addressing the key issues and cases. Some of the finer points have been overlooked, however.

4 Stars.

Marked by teacher Edward Smith 07/08/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Criminal law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Chain of causation problem question. The given case is concerned with the law ...

    4 star(s)

    The actus reus for a s47 OAPA 1861 offence is made out when a person assaults another causing actual bodily harm calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim (Donovan9).

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Criminal Law Omissions. In the English legal system there is generally no liability ...

    4 star(s)

    stay in their home to ensure they receive proper attention and aren't left neglected. An early authority of voluntary assumed duty of care is from the case of Nicholls 1874 where the defendant undertook the care of her grandchild, however the child died of neglect and the defendant was charged

  1. Marked by a teacher

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

    4 star(s)

    There is also an issue, of the fact that once a file is received the CPS review the case however once reviewed they do not keep up the The CPS are geographically structured, this can be a disadvantage as information given to the CPS at the top of the structure

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Critically consider all arguments concerning spousal compellability and conclude whether or not it ...

    4 star(s)

    is unrealistic to view cohabitees as any different from married couples, and therefore it is not justifiable to allow only married couples to benefit from non-compellability when cohabitees are, essentially, no different. BC Naud? suggests: ?Perhaps it is best to define today?s family in terms of the values associated with

  1. problem question on murder

    The prosecution must prove that Dr Dan's negligence 'giving a blood transfusion of the wrong type of blood' was so wrong that it could break the chain of causation. Boris will be able to evade liability of his act and omission. The prosecution will look at the case Cheshire 19916.

  2. Explain the difference between direct intent, oblique intent and subjective recklessness in English criminal ...

    However, a jury is also entitled to find intention where a defendant did not desire the result, but it is a virtually certain consequence of the act, and the accused realises this and goes ahead anyway.

  1. Critically assess the impact of the way in which media and politicians represented the ...

    Official response is that anyone found guilty of murder committed when under the age of 18 must be sentenced to 'detention during Her Majesty's pleasure'. Currently, a person convicted of murder that is aged 18 or over at the time of the offence but is under 21 on conviction must be sentenced to 'custody for life'.

  2. After Woollin, the law of Intention remains unclear, but nonetheless works in a satisfactory ...

    However, one thing that is clear and certain is that intention is a subjective concept and this has been confirmed by that of the section 8 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967[13], after the case of DPP v. Smith[14], where it was clear that a objective approach resulted in a

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work